Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, Species I (Fig. 1), Sub-species A, claims 1-4, 7 in the reply filed on 12/08/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that sub-species A and B are front and rear exploded views which are persuasive and considered during the examination.
Claims 5-6, 8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 12/08/2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the lid-picking 19” should be “the lid-picking”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-4, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 defines “..the lid-picking device selectively closes the mounting opening” in not clear in view of specification what it meant by selectively or how it is selected to close. Appropriate correction/clarification is required.
Claims 2 defines “on the panel” has antecedent issues which should be “on the door panel”.
Claim 2 defines in the last line “at least one of the inspection devices” has antecedent issues which should be “at least one of the multiple inspection devices”. Similar issues for claim 7.
Claim 2 defines “ multiple inspection devices” and claim 1 defines “an inspection device”? are these separate multiple inspection devices different from the inspection device of claim 1 or do not include that of claim 1? Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-4, 7 are also rejected being dependent on rejected claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP’2274 et al (JP 7082274 B2).
Regarding claim 1: JP’2274 teaches in Figs. 1-9 about a load port 1 comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
810
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a mounting base 42 having a top surface, wherein a movable plate (5+7) is mounted on the top surface, is movable (D direction) relative to the mounting base, and is provided with a fastening element 6;
an opening portion 41 including a board 4 mounted to a side of the mounting base and having a mounting opening (corresponding to the door 8 fitting opening) and a guide opening (corresponding to door/opening closing mechanism 9 and rod 80 moves up and down slot as best shown in Fig. 3) and the mounting opening disposed beside the movable plate (As shown); and
a driving assembly 9 mounted on the board and corresponding in position to the guide opening of the board (Fig.3, 5-6); and
a movable door (8+83, Fig. 5-6) including
a door panel 83;
a lid-picking device 8 and an inspection device M mounted on a side surface of the door panel (Fig. 5-6); and
a connecting rod 80 (Fig. 3) mounted on an end of the door panel, wherein the movable door (8 +83) is connected to the driving assembly 9 via the connecting rod, such that the door panel is movable relative to the board and the lid-picking device 8 selectively closes the mounting opening (Fig. 3, 5-6).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2-4, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over JP’2274 et al (JP 7082274 B2) in view of You et al (TW M626076 U).
Regarding claim 2: JP’2274 does not explicitly talk about wherein the inspection device. includes:
a carrying bracket securely mounted on the panel;
a sliding rail assembly slidably mounted on the carrying bracket;
two rotating pivoting arms, each of the pivoting arms having a proximal end and a distal end, and the proximal ends of the two pivoting arms pivotally connected to the sliding rail assembly and disposed apart from each other; and
multiple inspection devices, wherein the distal end of each of the pivoting arms is provided with at least one of the inspection devices.
You teaches in Fig. 1 about wherein the inspection device 10. includes:
a carrying bracket (11+12) securely mounted on the panel;
a sliding rail assembly slidably 30 mounted on the carrying bracket;
two rotating pivoting arms 20, each of the pivoting arms having a proximal end and a distal end, and the proximal ends of the two pivoting arms pivotally connected to the sliding rail assembly (As shown) and disposed apart from each other (both sides of 30); and
multiple inspection devices (40, 50), wherein the distal end of each of the pivoting arms is provided with at least one of the inspection devices (as shown).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application was filed to have the features as claimed according to the teachings of You in JP’2274’s door panel to perform detection alone, so as to reduce the process steps and improve the production efficiency, and the two rotating arms can be installed with at least two vertical detectors and at least two horizontal detectors, so each detector can be changed according to user needs The setting position and quantity of the device can achieve the effect of testing wafers of different specifications (You, page 2)
Regarding claim 3-4: JP’2274 teaches in Fig. 4, 6 wherein the lid-picking device has:
a panel 8(O) securely connected to the door panel 83 (Fig. 6) and selectively closes the mounting opening; and
multiple connecting elements 81/82 separately mounted on the panel.
PNG
media_image2.png
650
812
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7: You teaches wherein each of the inspection devices is a fiber optic sensor (on page 4 teaches sensors 40, 50 are optical fiber sensors).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED SHAMSUZZAMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1839. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7 am -4 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Fernando Toledo can be reached at 571-272-1867. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Mohammed Shamsuzzaman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897